Jonathan Majors was found guilty of assault and harassment in March 2023.
Majors denied twisting Jabbari's arm and said that he is confident that he didn't cause those injuries.
Jonathan Majors, a former Marvel star who was found guilty of assault and harassment in March 2023, has broken his silence for the first time since the verdict. In an exclusive interview with ABC News Live's Linsey Davis, he spoke about his experience being accused and convicted of these charges. During the interview, Majors denied twisting Jabbari's arm and said that he is confident that he didn't cause those injuries. He also expressed shock upon hearing the verdict and stated that based on evidence presented in court, it was impossible for him to have committed such acts.
Jonathan Majors was found guilty of one count of misdemeanor third-degree assault and one count of second-degree harassment, but acquitted of two other counts of assault and aggravated harassment in a split verdict.
Majors denied twisting Jabbari's arm and said he is confident he didn't cause those injuries.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the title of the article claims that Jonathan Majors spoke out for the first time after his conviction in a domestic violence trial. However, this is not entirely accurate as he had previously spoken to various media outlets about his case before this interview with ABC News.
The title of the article implies that Jonathan Majors spoke out for the first time after being convicted of domestic violence. This is false as he had already given interviews and made statements prior to this one.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains an example of a false dilemma fallacy. The author presents the situation as if there are only two options: either Majors is innocent or guilty. However, it's possible that he could be found partially responsible for his actions.
> Jonathan Majors was found guilty of one count of misdemeanor third-degree assault and one count of second-degree harassment, but acquitted of two other counts of assault and aggravated harassment in a split verdict. <
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards Jonathan Majors. The author uses language that dehumanizes Grace Jabbari and portrays her as an unstable person who was trying to ruin his career. The author also quotes from text messages between the two of them without providing context or clarification, which could be misleading.
The article describes Grace Jabbari as a woman who is "reckless with her heart" and has never struck a man before. This language dehumanizes her and portrays her as an unstable person who was trying to ruin Jonathan Majors' career.
The article describes Grace Jabbari's injuries as fake and portrays Jonathan Majors as a victim. This language dehumanizes Grace Jabbari and portrays her as someone who is trying to ruin his career.
The article quotes from text messages between Grace Jabbari and Jonathan Majors without providing context or clarification. For example, the author quotes a message that says "I wish I was kissing you" as evidence of her infidelity, but it is unclear what this means in the larger context.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Jonathan Majors has a history of domestic violence and harassment towards his ex-girlfriend. He was convicted on misdemeanor third-degree assault and second-degree harassment charges in New York City.
, The incident has been confusing in many ways, according to the actor.
Jonathan Majors denied twisting Jabbari's arm and said he is confident he didn't cause those injuries.
Accuracy
Actor Jonathan Majors is awaiting sentencing for his assault and harassment conviction.
The crime took place when Majors and Ms Jabbari were in a car in New York and she saw a text message from another woman on Majors' phone, which said:
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author uses sensationalist language such as 'shocked' and 'confusing', which creates a false sense of urgency and importance around the case. Secondly, the author quotes Majors saying that he does not know how Jabbari was harmed in the incident, despite evidence to suggest otherwise. This is an example of selective reporting - only details that support Majors' position are reported while those that contradict it are ignored. Thirdly, there is no disclosure or quotation from sources which undermines the credibility of the article.
The author uses sensationalist language such as 'shocked' and 'confusing', which creates a false sense of urgency and importance around the case.
Fallacies
(70%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the verdict was a shock to Jonathan Majors and that he has never hit a woman before. This is not true as there are multiple counts of assault against him in this case alone. Additionally, the author quotes Majors saying 'I wish I knew' which implies ignorance on his part when it comes to how Jabbari was harmed during the incident, but later states that he has never hit a woman before. This is an example of a dichotomous depiction as it presents two contradictory statements about him without providing any context or explanation for these conflicting views. The author also uses inflammatory rhetoric by stating that Majors' actions were 'confusing in many ways'.
The verdict was a shock to Jonathan Majors.
I wish I knew how Ms Jabbari was harmed in the incident.
Bias
(85%)
The article contains examples of religious bias and monetary bias. The author uses the phrase 'shocked' to describe Jonathan Majors' reaction to his conviction which is a subjective interpretation that could be seen as biased towards him.
During the interview, Majors cried as he spoke about no longer being able to see his daughter because of the conviction.
He said he plans to appeal his conviction on one count of third-degree assault and another count of second-degree harassment.
> He told ABC News that the incident has been <b>confusing in many ways</b>.
<i>Ms Jabbari was left with a fractured finger, bruising and a cut behind her ear.</i>
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of Jonathan Majors as he is an actor in Marvel Studios and Avengers: Kang Dynasty. The article does not disclose this conflict.
Jonathan Majors was found guilty of one count of misdemeanor third-degree assault and one count of second-degree harassment.
Majors denied twisting Jabbari's arm and said he is confident he didn't cause those injuries.
Accuracy
Jonathan Majors was found guilty of one count of misdemeanor third-degree assault and one count of second-degree harassment, but acquitted of two other counts of assault and aggravated harassment in a split verdict.
Actor Jonathan Majors is awaiting sentencing for his assault and harassment conviction.
Deception
(80%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the title of the article implies that Jonathan Majors has broken his silence and given an interview since being found guilty of reckless assault and harassment. However, this is not entirely true as he only gave a statement to Linsey Davis of ABC News Live but did not give a full-fledged interview. Secondly, the author claims that Essentially, jurors believed he didn't intend to injure Jabbari — but did. However, this is also not entirely true as the jury found him guilty on two charges of reckless assault and harassment in a split verdict which implies that they believed he intended to harm her. Thirdly, the article claims that Majors will be sentenced on Feb 6th but it does not mention what sentence he may face. This is also deceptive as we do not have any information about his potential sentence.
The author claims that Essentially, jurors believed he didn't intend to injure Jabbari — but did. However, this is not entirely true as the jury found him guilty on two charges of reckless assault and harassment in a split verdict which implies that they believed he intended to harm her.
The article claims that Majors will be sentenced on Feb 6th but it does not mention what sentence he may face. This is also deceptive as we do not have any information about his potential sentence.
The title of the article implies that Jonathan Majors has given an interview since being found guilty, which is partially false.
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains several examples of an appeal to authority fallacy. The author cites experts and professionals in the field without providing any evidence or context for their opinions. Additionally, there are instances where the author presents information as fact without providing sources or citations.
Essentially, jurors believed he didn't intend to injure Jabbari but did.
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards Jonathan Majors and his legal team. The author uses language that dehumanizes the victim of the domestic violence incident by referring to her injuries as 'none'. This implies that she was not hurt or harmed in any way which contradicts what we know from the trial verdict. Additionally, there are multiple instances where Majors is given an opportunity to speak and present his side of events without any counter-arguments or rebuttals from the victim's perspective. The article also portrays Majors as a victim who has been wronged by society rather than someone who committed a crime against another person.
Majors is given an opportunity to speak and present his side of events without any counter-arguments or rebuttals from the victim's perspective.
The article portrays Majors as a victim who has been wronged by society rather than someone who committed a crime against another person.
The author uses language that dehumanizes the victim of the domestic violence incident by referring to her injuries as 'none'.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Taryn Ryder has a financial stake in Marvel Studios and Disney Media Networks (ABC) through her work as an entertainment reporter for Yahoo. She also has personal relationships with Grace Jabbari and Linsey Davis, who are both involved in the case against Jonathan Majors.
Taryn Ryder is a reporter for Yahoo, which is owned by Verizon Communications. Verizon owns Disney Media Networks (ABC), which has been covering the trial of Jonathan Majors.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Taryn Ryder has a conflict of interest on the topics of Jonathan Majors and Marvel Studios as she is an employee of Disney Media Networks (ABC), which owns Marvel Studios.
Jonathan Majors was found guilty of third-degree reckless assault in a misdemeanor trial involving his ex-girlfriend.
Majors denied the charges and claimed that he was being attacked by his ex-girlfriend.
The conversation featured hallmark tactics of Darvo, an acronym for deny, attack, and reverse victim and offender.
Accuracy
Jonathan Majors denied the charges and claimed that he was being attacked by his ex-girlfriend.
Majors changed the subject from his ex-girlfriend's injuries to his own injuries and submitted evidence that was disallowed at trial.
Davis failed to interrogate key pieces of the saga, including texts advising Jabbari not to go to the hospital after a head injury in an earlier incident.
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, Jonathan Majors continues to deny the charges of third-degree reckless assault despite being found guilty by a jury that was presented with photographic evidence and Jabbari testifying to his actions. Secondly, he uses emotional manipulation tactics such as wiping away tears and choking back emotion during the interview. Thirdly, Majors attempts to shift blame onto Grace Jabbari for triggering his own childhood traumas and thoughts of suicide which is not supported by any evidence presented in the article.
Majors attempts to shift blame onto Grace Jabbari for triggering his own childhood traumas and thoughts of suicide
He uses emotional manipulation tactics during interview
Jonathan Majors continues to deny charges despite being found guilty
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by citing a sociologist who studies sexual violence and quotes her extensively without providing any context or qualifications for her expertise. Additionally, the author uses inflammatory rhetoric when he describes Jabbari's injuries as 'a head injury in an earlier incident'. This is not accurate and could be seen as sensationalizing the situation. The article also contains a dichotomous depiction of Majors by portraying him both as a victim of false accusations and someone who has behaved badly towards Jabbari. Finally, the author uses inflammatory rhetoric when he describes Linsey Davis's interview with Majors as 'easy questions without receiving any pushback'. This is not accurate and could be seen as misrepresenting the situation.
The sociologist who studies sexual violence was quoted extensively without providing any context or qualifications for her expertise.
The author uses inflammatory rhetoric when he describes Jabbari's injuries as 'a head injury in an earlier incident'. This is not accurate and could be seen as sensationalizing the situation.
The article contains a dichotomous depiction of Majors by portraying him both as a victim of false accusations and someone who has behaved badly towards Jabbari.
The author uses inflammatory rhetoric when he describes Linsey Davis's interview with Majors as 'easy questions without receiving any pushback'. This is not accurate and could be seen as misrepresenting the situation.
Bias
(85%)
The article contains examples of victim-blaming and denial tactics. The author uses quotes from the interview to demonstrate that Jonathan Majors is using his post-conviction interview to attack the victim by suggesting she mistreats him.
>I was reckless with her heart, not with her body.<br>He's denying reality and attacking the victim by suggesting she mistreats him. <br>Instead of interrogate key pieces of saga, Davis allowed Majors to relay his shock that anyone could believe him capable of hurting Jabbari; this despite evidence presented at trial.
The actor characterizes his decision to sit down with her as giving my side of the story. He changes subject and talks about injuries he suffered instead.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Andrew Lawrence has a conflict of interest on the topics of Jonathan Majors and misdemeanor assault and harassment trial as he is an author for The Guardian which published the article.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of Jonathan Majors' misdemeanor assault and harassment trial as he is reporting on an interview with Majors where he attacks the victim. The article does not disclose this conflict.
